Talk:Wikibooks/Logo/Archive 4
Add topic | This page is kept for historical interest. Any policies mentioned may be obsolete. If you want to revive the topic, you can use the talk page or start a discussion on the community forum. |
Color restriction and Ph. 3 voting
[edit]Copying from the voting page:
- Wouldn't the no-Foundation-color restriction make phase 3 voting come to nothing? --朝彦 (Asahiko) 14:29, 16 October 2006 (UTC)
- Nope, the logo will simply undergo refinement after the vote is over -- as did ALL logos up to now. Remember the ugly multicolour puzzle ball that the Wikipedia logo originally was? —Nightstallion (?) 10:42, 17 October 2006 (UTC)
Sorry, maybe my wording wasn't clear enough. What I'm trying to say here is this: The candidates for the Wikibooks logo was already reduced to only two groups in the first vote. Some changes and refinements took place in phase 2, but no major changes in the design itself; only changes were colors. Some made the Abstract Book into a pastel-flavored one, and a green/blue Stylized Book came out. The ph.3 votes were about the colors, not design.
One slight problem here: the voting page did not say anything about Wikimedia colors. (That's why, for example, I voted for #B1, not #B3. I didn't know about the color problem and thought that WMF colors are nice. Phase 2 page mentions the color concern btw, but I wasn't there when ph.2 discussions were taking place.) After we have our winner, we're probably going to play around with its colors. However, some color variants were "disapproved" in ph.3 with some voters not knowing that the WMF color version should be avoided.
And this is my concern. Can we use the color variations which lost in ph.3 or not? I mean, I feel that there were good color variants out there, and it's a pity to bury them when we have to change the colors anyway. But then, if we bring back the variants, some people might feel it unfair for a candidate which lost in a previous vote to come back. And this is what I mean by ph.3 coming to nothing. We (the voters) chose WMF colors over others. I welcome comments from other users ^_^ --朝彦 (Asahiko) 16:28, 17 October 2006 (UTC)
- I just want to say that there is the same problem with 2 of the 4 logos for Wiktionary. I don't know how it will be solved... If we have to change the colors,some logos from previous phases could have been better. - Darkdadaah 19:23, 17 October 2006 (UTC)
Phase 3 should be cancelled. Let us vote again with out the Wikimedian-colour options. -- Dante, the Wicked 03:06, 18 October 2006 (UTC)
- Frankly, I really do not know. I was contacted by User:Elian after I had already started the final phase of the vote, so it didn't really make sense to me to cancel a process which had already been started; I foresee some rather difficult discussion after the vote is over, though, between the voters and their will and the marketing department. ::sighs:: Why can't things be simple in life just once in a while? —Nightstallion (?) 13:56, 19 October 2006 (UTC)
Signatures
[edit]We've had a couple votes cast without logging in or providing any username:
- For A: 84.68.212.133 [1], 131.111.202.158 [2]
- For B: 207.174.249.2, 158.83.236.193
The second voter at least signed their vote with an IP address, so perhaps they do have an account but forgot to log in. Should we count these votes? – Minh Nguyễn (talk, contribs) 21:50, 24 October 2006 (UTC)
- Surely no! --Dante, the Wicked 19:38, 29 October 2006 (UTC)
- Right now, I guess it wouldn't matter anyways. This contest is pretty much in favor of B. – Minh Nguyễn (talk, contribs) 20:42, 29 October 2006 (UTC)